There is no excuse. “Signalgate” shows top officials played fast and loose with security. Just as Wikileaks exposed former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton’s venality and abuse of travel, Signalgate shined light into just how amateurish President Donald Trump’s top team was.
Sure, national security adviser Mike Waltz might be to blame for adding Atlantic editor Jeffrey Goldberg to a Signal chat, but Secretary of Defense Pete Hegseth has only himself to blame for the immaturity and lack of judgment his contributions exposed. That none of those participating in the Signal chat understood that foreign intelligence services could penetrate Signal shows a culture of impunity and carelessness is now the rule rather than the exception. That Middle East envoy Steve Witkoff apparently logged into Signal from Moscow, if not inside the Kremlin itself, should itself be a fireable offense. The silver lining is that the scandal now makes it less likely any of those involved will be using their cellphones or laptops on any visit to China.
In terms of security violations, there is no mitigating what occurred, but as members of Congress, political commentators, and journalists pile on with outrage and indignation, my American Enterprise Institute colleague Danielle Pletka is right to ask: Where is the similar outrage on issues far more consequential?
There is something deeply wrong when the media take up the Signalgate story with gusto, but editors condemn the withdrawal from Afghanistan down the memory hole. Ironically, it was the same Jeffrey Goldberg who gave an immature and arrogant national security adviser, Jake Sullivan, cover to help him spin his decisions and rehabilitate his image after the chaos at Kabul’s international airport.
As a certain subsegment of media and the outrage industry opines on Signalgate, how much better the world might be if the very real repression of the women of Afghanistan, the deliberate blinding of Iranian protesters with grapeshot, the concentration camps China has built to destroy the Uyghur people, and the hundreds of thousands of Americans killed by Chinese fentanyl generated even a fraction of such sustained outrage. Congress might host an occasional hearing on these problems, but only a C-SPAN audience will notice.
This is not a case of “whataboutism.” Throw the book at those Trump members stupid enough to create a Signal group for war plans. Still, while Democrats and Republicans engage in circular firing squads and partisan and ego-driven journalists throw fuel on the fire, the United States hemorrhages its influence and ability to address stories more consequential and on a far greater scale.
Thirty-five years ago, the press coverage drove broad outrage at the blood emerging from the Sierra Leone blood diamond trade. Twenty years ago, the international community drew together to counter atrocities in Darfur. During the Obama administration, Hollywood and the press converged to address warlord Joseph Kony’s conscription of child soldiers.
TRUMP CALLS ATLANTIC STORY ‘FAKE NEWS,’ WON’T FIRE ANYONE OVER SIGNAL GROUP CHAT LEAK
Today, however, journalists debate security clearances and emojis as the world’s bloodiest conflict — not Ukraine or Gaza, but the civil war in Sudan — has killed more than 500,000 and displaced 8 million more. Few journalists cover the slaughter of Christians in Biafra, the breakaway region of Nigeria now teetering once again on the edge of genocide. The ethnic cleansing of 120,000 indigenous Christians from Nagorno-Karabakh generated, at best, a week’s mention.
With Azerbaijan parading ethnic Armenians in show trials and threatening to invade Armenia despite a supposed peace agreement, how much more might be accomplished if the press channeled outrage at events that affected millions of people rather than simply seeking a new way to throw a wrench into the gears of the other party’s appointees? Perhaps the true scandal of Signalgate is not its participants but those who selectively and blindly feed upon such outrage to the exclusion of the world around them.
Michael Rubin is a contributor to the Washington Examiner’s Beltway Confidential blog. He is director of analysis at the Middle East Forum and a senior fellow at the American Enterprise Institute.